←back to thread

Only 5.3% of US welders are women. After years as a professor, I became one

(theconversation.com)
254 points Michelangelo11 | 2 comments | 06 Nov 24 00:24 UTC | HN request time: 0.416s | source
Show context
naming_the_user ◴[06 Nov 24 01:47 UTC] No.42056718[source]▶
What comes across from the article to me is the class barrier more than the gender one - basically it's a posh person finding out what the "real world" looks like.

Shop talk and banter are fairly universal. Any difference is going to be a target. Thin bloke who doesn't look strong enough? Ginger hair? Tall guy, short guy? Weird tattoo, etc. Definitely the one black guy or the one white guy is going to get shit. But is it malicious? Almost certainly not.

The other thing, which in my experience is relatively common worldwide, is that working class communities are more accepting of male-female dynamics. In academia and in highbrow society the tendency is to basically sanitise every social interaction. When you're in an environment where that isn't happening then you can't suddenly ignore it any more.

replies(20): >>42056746 #>>42056800 #>>42056807 #>>42056887 #>>42057157 #>>42057392 #>>42057456 #>>42058227 #>>42059471 #>>42063467 #>>42064057 #>>42064775 #>>42064864 #>>42065506 #>>42066833 #>>42067884 #>>42069349 #>>42070085 #>>42070433 #>>42071751 #
Rendello ◴[06 Nov 24 01:54 UTC] No.42056746[source]▶
It was interesting for me going from interacting with wealthy, educated developers, to working in a very physical, low-paying blue-collar job. It seemed like living in two different worlds almost.

> working class communities are more accepting of male-female dynamics

I'm curious to what you mean by this

replies(3): >>42056759 #>>42056813 #>>42057076 #
1. qazxcvbnmlp ◴[06 Nov 24 02:14 UTC] No.42056813[source]▶
> working class communities are more accepting of male-female dynamics

I’ve also seen this. There’s more of an acknowledgment: that people will be attracted to each other (or not),the status/dating games people play will be out and open. It will be acceptable to talk about physical/sexual qualities of your coworkers, etc. That when you are in physically close proximity you might see each others sexual parts and comment on them. It will be understood that after a breakup people will be less amicable.

You can also see this in literature: look at Les Miserables. In the factory they talk about sexual fantasies of the foreman. Whereas in the context of the upper classes it’s talked about in context of love/romanticism.

Contrary to popular believe, I find this much healthier. Emotions expressed can be dealt with and moved on. Emotions suppressed grow and fester. If it’s normal to talk about who’s is attracted to who, then everyone is aware of the sexual exploits of the general manager. Therefore people know where to set boundaries. If it’s hush hush kept quiet then the exploits of the Gm can grow.

replies(1): >>42064092 #
2. Spivak ◴[06 Nov 24 15:48 UTC] No.42064092[source]▶
I kind of get this for men, what you're saying makes sense and is for sure the healthier option if all was equal. The sticking point is the social and power asymmetry. Being commented on in that manner is low-key kind of threatening. The name of the game is appease the guy long enough for your friends to get you out of there. And when you're at work it's hard to just leave. Guys with nothing to lose don't take soft-nos for an answer and hard-nos are how you get assaulted, from experience that one.

The dynamic works when flirting is within a social circle because bad behavior risks your social status in the group and it works in bars because you're equals, around friends, and can just leave. At work, at least in an office, is kinda the worst combination. I've seen it work well outside of office settings because there aren't as complicated power dynamics— we're all equally in the shit in the kitchen.